[LLVMdev] [RFC] Raising minimum required Visual Studio version to 2013 for trunk

[Reid Kleckner]

+1 for 2013. The feature set is worth it.

I expect that there will still be major incompatibilities around
initializer lists, so I would avoid them unless you have MSVC or are OK
with diagnosing the problem from a buildbot.


On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org>
wrote:

> I just broke a build by committing initializer list and a few other
> C++11 stuff on the LoopVectorizer... :/
>
> cheers,
> --renato
>
> PS: The lld Windows bot is 2011, so that surely needs upgrading anyway...
>
> On 19 August 2014 00:48, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote:
> > For my money: variadic templates and some bug I hit when trying to use
> > forward_as_tuple.
> >
> > On Aug 18, 2014 4:02 PM, "Aaron Ballman" <aaron at aaronballman.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Chris Bieneman <beanz at apple.com>
> wrote:
> >> > I’d like to propose raising the minimum required compiler for the
> LLVM &
> >> > Clang trunks for Visual Studio to MSVC 2013.
> >> >
> >> > Doing this will allow us to take advantage of a bunch of C++11
> features
> >> > that are not supported by MSVC 2012. According to MSDN
> >> > (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh567368.aspx) the list is:
> >> >
> >> > * Non-static data member initializers
> >> > * Variadic templates
> >> > * Initializer lists
> >> > * Default template arguments for function templates
> >> > * Expression SFINAE
> >> > * Alias templates
> >> > * Delegating constructors
> >> > * Explicit conversion operators
> >> > * Raw string literals
> >> > * Defaulted and deleted functions
> >> >
> >> > Questions, comments, concerns, general feedback?
> >>
> >> We shifted the minimum MSVC version to 2012 in January of this year,
> >> and have run into only a few issues where C++11 features exist in MSVC
> >> 2013 but not MSVC 2012. So I'm wondering what problem this solves in
> >> practice for our code base?
> >>
> >> Personally, I use MSVC 2013 instead of 2012. But I would hesitate to
> >> switch to 2013 as the minimum supported version just yet. It's been
> >> out for less than two years and until "14" drops, it is the newest
> >> version of the compiler. When we made the switch, the goal was to
> >> support only the last two versions of MSVC, and I don't see any strong
> >> evidence to support expediting that schedule. I think this is a great
> >> plan for when "14" is officially released.
> >>
> >> ~Aaron
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140821/068b0935/attachment.html>